Article 117a UCMJ – Wrongful Distribution or Broadcasting of Intimate Images – Military Defense Lawyers
UCMJ Military Defense Guide by Gonzalez & Waddington
Article 117a of the Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibits the wrongful distribution, broadcasting, or publication of intimate visual images without the consent of the person depicted. Enacted in the wake of high-profile “revenge porn” scandals, Article 117a is one of the newest and most aggressively-enforced sexual misconduct provisions under military law.
Article 117a cases often involve cell phones, cloud storage, social media, AirDrop, texting, group chats, Snapchat, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, TikTok, Dropbox, and accidental or automatic uploads. Many allegations stem from misunderstandings, misclicks, accidental sharing, unauthorized access by third parties, mistaken identity, or intentional manipulation by a vengeful ex-partner.
Florida’s bases—NAS Jacksonville, Mayport, Pensacola, Whiting Field, Eglin, Hurlburt, Tyndall, Patrick SFB, MacDill, NAS Key West, NSA Panama City and all Coast Guard sectors—see high volumes of 117a allegations due to heavy digital device use, nightlife environments, shared barracks spaces, mixed military-civilian relationships, and Florida’s intense dating culture.
Gonzalez & Waddington defends service members worldwide in complex digital-image cases. We dismantle weak prosecutions by exposing lack of intent, unauthorized access, hacking, cloud-autosync errors, revenge manipulation, and investigative misinterpretation of digital artifacts.
What Article 117a Criminalizes
The offense requires the government to prove that the accused:
- Knowingly distributed, broadcasted, or published an intimate visual image;
- The person depicted was at least partially nude or engaged in a sexual act;
- The person had a reasonable expectation of privacy;
- The distribution was without their consent;
- The accused knew or reasonably should have known that distribution would cause harm, humiliation, or distress;
- The conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline or service-discrediting.
This offense covers images shared during relationships, private “selfies,” intimate videos, and any digital content that depicts nudity or sexual conduct.
Types of Conduct Covered by Article 117a
- Revenge porn allegations (post-breakup sharing)
- Group chat sharing
- AirDrop/quick share accidental transfers
- Cloud auto-sync leakage (iCloud, Google Photos)
- Phone stolen and images shared by another person
- Shared phone passwords leading to unauthorized access
- Partners sending images to others without the accused’s knowledge
- Intimate videos involving consenting adults later claimed to be “non-consensual sharing”
- Accidental posting on social media stories
- Barracks roommates discovering and sharing images from a shared device
Many cases arise from deception or intentional manipulation by a jealous ex, an angry spouse, or a civilian trying to gain leverage over a military partner.
Elements of Article 117a
The prosecution must prove ALL of the following:
1. The Accused Distributed or Broadcasted an Image
This includes sending, uploading, posting, showing, sharing, or transmitting.
2. The Image Was an “Intimate Visual Image”
Includes:
- Genitals
- Anus
- Areola/nipple of a female breast
- Any sexual act
3. Lack of Consent
The subject did not authorize distribution.
4. Reasonable Expectation of Privacy
Images taken in private spaces or during consensual relationships.
5. Intent or Reckless Disregard
The accused knew or should have known distribution would cause harm.
Maximum Punishments Under Article 117a
Penalties can be severe:
- Confinement up to 7 years (depending on circumstances)
- Dishonorable discharge
- Total forfeitures
- Reduction to E-1
- Loss of clearance
- Mandatory separation
Sex offender registration is sometimes required depending on image content and jurisdiction.
Why Article 117a Allegations Are Common in Florida
Florida produces more image-sharing cases than almost any other state due to:
- Heavy social media usage among young service members
- Nude selfies and intimate video exchanges in relationships
- Nightlife culture leading to alcohol-driven mistakes
- Shared barracks rooms with unsecured devices
- Breakups and jealousy-fueled revenge allegations
- Civilian partners using 117a to punish military members
- Accidental posting or syncing
Most Florida 117a cases are not intentional wrongdoing—they’re misunderstandings or digital accidents.
Common Real-World Article 117a Scenarios
1. Accidental Sharing
Wrong AirDrop recipient, cloud sync, mis-click uploading to Instagram or Snapchat.
2. Revenge Allegations
Partners falsely claim nonconsensual sharing after a breakup.
3. Third-Party Distribution
Someone else accessed the accused’s phone and shared images.
4. Hacking/Unauthorized Access
Former partners often have stored passwords or Apple ID access.
5. Private Videos Found by Roommates
Shared living spaces create many false accusations.
6. Partner Consent Later Withdrawn
Images sent consensually become “nonconsensual” after relationship collapse.
7. Barracks Gossip & Drama
Someone claims the accused “shared” something when no such act occurred.
8. Screenshots or Screen-Recordings
Recording a video for personal use misinterpreted as “distribution.”
How Article 117a Investigations Work
Typical investigators include:
- NCIS
- OSI
- CID
- CGIS
- Civilian digital crimes units
- Command-directed inquiries
Frequent Investigative Errors
- Misunderstanding metadata
- No proof of intentional distribution
- Content uploaded automatically by cloud sync
- No proof the accused sent the image
- Third-party access ignored
- No forensic analysis of device
- Assuming guilt because an image “came from their phone”
Many Article 117a cases collapse when digital forensics expose investigator incompetence.
Defense Strategies for Article 117a Cases
1. Prove No Intent to Distribute
- Accidental clicks
- Drunken errors
- Misfires in group chats
- Auto-sync uploads
2. Show Lack of Distribution
We prove the accused never actually sent or displayed the content.
3. Expose Third-Party Access
- Roommates
- Partners with passwords
- Stolen phones
- Shared cloud accounts
4. Attack Image Authenticity or Identity
Many images allegedly showing the accused sharing them were fabricated or misattributed.
5. Florida-Specific Defense Angles
- Tourist-heavy nightlife leading to drunken mistakes, not intent
- Barracks cramped conditions = unauthorized access common
- Civilian partners weaponizing intimate images
6. Suppress Illegally Seized Devices
Phone seizures in barracks are frequently unlawful.
Pro Tips for Anyone Accused Under Article 117a
- Do NOT talk to investigators or command.
- Do NOT give anyone your passcode or unlock your phone.
- Preserve all digital evidence immediately.
- Stop using social media.
- Document anyone else who had access to your device.
- Do not delete anything—it looks like guilt.
- Hire a civilian military defense lawyer.
Related UCMJ Articles
- UCMJ Article Hub
- Article 134 – Harassing Communications
- Article 127 – Extortion
- Article 120c – Other Sexual Misconduct
- Article 131d – Retaliation
Article 117a UCMJ – Frequently Asked Questions
Do accidental uploads count as “wrongful distribution”?
No. The government must prove intent. Accidental AirDrops, cloud sync uploads, or wrong-recipient sends are not criminal when properly defended.
What if someone else accessed my phone?
Then you are not guilty. Unauthorized access is one of the strongest defenses in Article 117a cases.
Do I have to register as a sex offender?
Possibly, depending on what was shared and the jurisdiction. Our goal is to prevent any conviction or reduce charges to avoid registration.
What if the alleged “victim” originally sent the images?
Very common. Consent to create an image does NOT equal consent to distribute it. But the context often proves the accused had no wrongful intent. We use digital forensics to prove this.
Why hire Gonzalez & Waddington?
We are leaders in digital-evidence military defense. Our firm has dismantled countless Article 117a cases using expert forensics, metadata analysis, phone extractions, and advanced trial strategy.
Final Takeaways
Article 117a cases are rarely about intentional wrongdoing. Most involve digital accidents, misinterpretation, cloud-sync issues, drunken mistakes, or revenge-motivated false accusations. With expert digital forensics and aggressive legal strategy, these cases can often be dismissed or massively reduced.
Your silence protects you.
Your lawyer defends you.
Your strategy saves your career.
➤ Contact Gonzalez & Waddington for Immediate Article 117a Defense